b5 - forgetting Flashcards
why do we forget?
memory has disappeared and is no longer available
or
memory can’t be retrieved and is not accessible
how is information from the short term memory forgotten?
decay and displacement
how is information from the long term memory forgotten?
interference, retrieval failure and lack of consolidation
define interference
where two lots of information becomes confused in memory
when is interference more likely to occur?
when memories are similar
when is interference less likely to occur?
when there is a gap between the instances of leaning
what are the two types of interference?
proactive interference
and
retroactive interference
define proactive interference
when old information interferes with access to new information
give an example of proactive interference
learning german but influenced by existing knowledge of french
define retroactive interference
new information distorts existing (old) information
give an example of retroactive interference
hard to recall prior knowledge of french after learning german
name a study of proactive interference
Underwood (1957)
explain Underwood’s interference study
words encountered later on in word list remembered worse than those earlier on in the list
ppts who learnt one list recalled 70%
ppts who learnt 10 or more recalled 20%
name a study of retroactive interference
McGeoch and McDonald (1931)
explain McGeoch and McDonald’s interference study
changed the amount of similarity between two sets of materials.
procedure: ppts learnt a list of 10 words until 100% accuracy, then learnt another.
group 1: synonyms.
group 2: antonyms.
group 3: unrelated to original.
group 4: nonsense syllables.
group 5: three-digit numbers.
group 6: (control group) no new list.
findings: performance depended on the second list, most similar material (synonyms) = worst recall - interference strongest when memories are similar - words with same meanings were confused with old material.
different material (numbers) number of items recalled increased
state two strengths of interference theory
evidence from lab studies supports eg. McGeogh and McDonald and evidence from real life studies support eg. Baddeley and Hitch
explain Baddeley and Hitche’s (1977) study of interference
asked rugby players to recall names of teams they’d played that season
players who had played fewer games recalled more than those who played more games
state two limitations of interference theory
the use of artificial material in lab experiments (not reflective of everyday life) - lacks ecological validity
and
experiments are designed to produce maximum interference
what’s the difference between accessibility and availability of information in memory?
material is not accessible (can’t find it) even though it is available (it is actually present)
this is likely due to a lack of the right triggers or cues
define retrieval failure
a form of forgetting that occurs when we don’t have the necessary cues to access a memory
the memory is available but not accessible unless the suitable cues are provided.
define what cues are
a trigger of information that allows us to access a memory.
such cues may be meaningful or indirectly linked by being encoded at the time of leaning
define encoding specific principle
when a cue has to be present at encoding (learning) and at retrieval (recall)
if the cues are different there will be some forgetting
what are mnemonics a type of?
meaningful cues - they are linked to the material to be remembered in a meaningful way.
eg. BECAUSE - Big Elephants Can…
encoding specificity principle - what are the two types of non meaningful cue encoding?
context dependent forgetting - external/ environment cues, eg. weather / place
state dependent forgetting - internal cues, eg. mood, physical state (drunk)
name a study of retrieval failure theory
Tilting and Pearlstone (1966)
explain Tulving and Pearlstone’s study of retrieval failure theory
used categories and external cues.
procedure: ppts remember 48 words (12 categories with 4 words) eg. fruit (category heading) apple etc.
control group - asked to recal words (free recall) - 40% words recalled
ppts given category headings (cues recall) - 60% words recalled
name a study of context dependent forgetting
Hidden and Baddeley (1975)
explain Godden and Baddeley’s study of context dependent forgetting
procedure: divers learnt a list a of words either underwater or on land and then recalled either underwater or on land.
group 1: learnt on land - recalled on land
group 2: learnt on land - recalled underwater
group 3: learnt underwater - recalled on land
group 4: learnt underwater- recalled underwater.
findings: when settings were the same, they recalled more words. the similarity of the contexts provided retrieval cues.
recalled on land: learnt on land = 37%. learnt underwater = 23%
recalled underwater: learnt on land = 24%. learnt underwater = 32%
name a study of state dependent forgetting
Goodwin et al. (1969)
explain Goodwin ye al’s study of date dependent forgetting
procedure: medical students taught tasks
condition 1: learnt drunk - recall sober
condition 2: learnt drunk - recall drunk
condition 3: learnt sober - recall drunk
condition 4: learnt sober - recall sober
findings: better recall when learning and recall happen in the same state
state two strengths of retrieval failure theory
lots of evidence supports: increases validity - studies from real life situations
and
have useful everyday applications: real life applications in the cognitive interview used in eye whiteness testimony
state two limitations of retrieval failure theory
context effects are not actually very strong in real life: different contexts have to be very different before an effect is seen, eg. learning in one room than recalling in another will have little effect on recall.
and
context effects o lay occur when memory is tested in certain ways: Godden and Baddeley replicated the divers experiment with a recognition test rather than recall test and there was no context dependent effect - recall was the same in all four conditions.
